Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

https://answersingenesis.org/reviews/tv ... cebook-aig"Now there are few people who actually deny climate change entirely, but it’s not us at AiG—a fact Ken Ham has pointed out to Bill Nye before. What some scientists and others do deny are the claims that man is causing all or nearly all climate change. To claim that those who disagree with one specific interpretation of very limited data are “climate change deniers”—when it’s obvious that climates change—is untrue and does nothing to further Nye’s argument.""Very limited data"? What pathological liars these people are. Even the Bible is more correct and factual than these stupid bigots. (And they seem to assume that Nye is always talking about, and 'misrepresenting', them.)"... there is not one shred of evidence to support life on Mars (or any other planet) or an extraterrestrial origin for life on earth". The bigots ignore this recent story regarding the moon Enceladus: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39592059"He rejects the Creator and His Word and instead relies on human reasoning to solve the world’s problems (real or perceived)." Citing Bible verses will never solve the world's problems. Most people think the Bible is an out of date 'human' book. Human reasoning might help solve a few of the world's problems (though people like AiG are doing their best to prevent that by spreading fake science and fake scepticism).

(I am not trying to justify the silliness - not viewed but read about - on part of that Bill Nye TV programme. It has provided ammunition for the crusades of Ham and Comfort.)

And the quote by Comfort - shown in a comment just made below - manages to TWIST what Genesis actually says (YEC is a cult):http://www.joeledmundanderson.com/?p=2524#comment-839Genesis does not state "that every animal brings forth after its own kind" that is an interpretation of Genesis only. Genesis says that creatures were created according to kinds.

PS (at 7.15 pm):In fact I see that Genesis 1:24 is rendered by the New American Standard Bible as: "Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so." But Comfort is TWISTING the meaning - his full quote is "The Bible, on the other hand, passes the scientific method. The book of Genesis says that every animal brings forth after its own kind, and that there is male and female. We see that in the existing creation and in the fossil record. It passes the scientific test. Darwinian evolution doesn’t. It’s nothing but a fairytale for grown-ups. It’s unproven and unprovable, but it’s embraced by millions because it opens the door to the delightful pleasures of sin, as the Bible says ‘for a season'". He is PRETENDING that 'brings forth' is referring to REPRODUCTION - and is pretending that the Bible is 'scientific' and 'refuting evolution' - but it is referring to CREATION not reproduction.

(1)"Also, the world before Noah’s Flood probably didn’t have high mountains". The Bible says NO such thing. It says at Genesis 8:4 (which one could reasonably assume is referring to mountains that already existed before Noah's Flood):"... and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat".This is after Genesis 7:17-20:"For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits."

Where on earth does the Bible suggest or imply that before Noah's Flood there might not have been any 'high mountains'? Precisely nowhere. Or is the peak known as Mount Ararat. which reaches an altitude of 16,000 ft, 'not' high? No wonder people think many YECs are 'not of this world'. But they produce piles of unmitigated garbage that might help convert a few to Christianity but also cons millions (and helps part them from some of their money).

(2)"Noah didn’t need two tigers, two lions, two leopards, and so on—he only needed two of the cat kind. In fact, Noah probably had fewer than 7,000 animals."The Bible says NO such thing. It says at Genesis 6 19-20 (apparently referring to pairs of animals of the same species as we would now describe them ie pairs that could breed and produce viable offspring): "You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive."

One 'misconception' out of three is pretty poor going. Especially as the other two are misconceptions BY Answers in Genesis:

By the way, AiG have recently silently blocked me from the Ark Encounter and Creation Museum facebook pages. I wonder why (sort of) I was combative at times but I was neither rude nor attacking Christianity in general nor wantonly abusive.

And the young earth creationist ignoramus Ray Comfort, a friend of AiG, also blatantly twists the Bible - to suit his agenda: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2967&start=1710 (post dated 28 April)

Comfort is claiming that "the book of Genesis says that every animal brings forth after its own kind". The full Comfort quote, at WND is:"The Bible, on the other hand, passes the scientific method. The book of Genesis says that every animal brings forth after its own kind, and that there is male and female. We see that in the existing creation and in the fossil record. It passes the scientific test. Darwinian evolution doesn’t. It’s nothing but a fairytale for grown-ups. It’s unproven and unprovable, but it’s embraced by millions because it opens the door to the delightful pleasures of sin, as the Bible says ‘for a season'."

But what the Bible really says, during the creation account in Genesis 1, is "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind."

These people appear to have no conscience:

Many Christians are not like this and prefer truth to bigotry, dishonesty, and dogma."

These evil hypocrite 'Christians' have not refuted my comments about their Lost Squadron exhibit. They have silently censored them. And blocked me from defending myself against accusations. Typical lying and craven young earth creationist ideologues protecting their falsehoods and bigotry - whatever it takes.

I saved my main comment however. It read as follows:""The fact that these aircraft were buried under more than 250 feet of snow and ice in less than 50 years reveals the unreliability of using so called annual layers as a dating method." No it absolutely does NOT. An ice core is a core sample that is typically removed from an ice sheet, most commonly from the polar ice caps of Antarctica, Greenland or from high mountain glaciers elsewhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet The planes landed near Greenland's eastern coast, not in a location where ice cores that up to took hundreds of thousands of years to form remain in place. The Greenland Ice Core Project (GRIP) was a multinational European research project which r ran from 1989 to 1995, with drilling seasons from 1990 to 1992; it successfully drilled a 3029-metre ice core to the bed of the Greenland ice sheet at Summit, Central Greenland. https://ncse.com/.../kentucky-gets-ark-shaped-second... "A prime example in how incompetently AiG deals with evidence comes from the discounting of the importance of ice cores drilled in Greenland and Antarctica. Ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica contain a record of hundreds of thousands of years of the earth’s climate; they are some of the most important data in understanding this subject. For example, cores sampled by the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA) record 740,000 years of climatic history, and further coring has the potential to provide data on more than the last 900,000 years (see the overview here). AiG does everything it can to discount ice core data, even repeating the story of the “Lost Squadron” of airplanes that landed on a glacier in Greenland during World War II and were discovered forty-eight years later buried under 80 meters of ice (Figure 43). Thus the young-earth creationists claim that the ice forms much more rapidly than scientists claim. However, this creationist claim was debunked with data more than twenty years ago. The planes landed on an active, moving glacier, near the shore of Greenland, where there are high rates of snowfall. In contrast, ice cores are taken in the stable interiors of the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps where the rates of snow accumulation are tiny compared to the coastal regions of Greenland."

And then the evil Christian Jaeschke (who calls people 'trolls' for challenging the disgusting falsehoods put out by the Ken Ham propaganda machine) gloated:"Ashley, I can't help it if you don't listen to Randy's reasoning. We get enough of your nonsense everywhere we go. Off you trot, now."

Don't confuse these fascistic cretins with facts. They are allergic to the 'wrong' sort of facts.

I see that fascist liar Bob Sorensen has helpfully informed fascist liar Christian Jaeschke of my comment here about his gloating after the fascist liars at AiG destroyed my comment on the Ark Encounter facebook page:

"By the way, you got Haywire the Stalker angry. Not a difficult thing. He acts like everything he does is good and has all the facts, and those who reject his nonsense are stupid evil fascist cowards. He cries a lot. -CBB"https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/

It's delusional fascistic dishonest lying cowards who resort to lying and censorship, Bob and Christian. Not their challengers.

The liars at AIG (and followers like The Cowbob Boy) don't like to be caught in their lies. Censorship is their only remaining argument. (It should serve as a reminder to their readers that if they REALLY thought their reasoning is sound, they would preserve all such contrary posts so that their followers could observe how they go about "winning" the debate by means of sound evidence and analysis---but they know that that is not the case.)

It is similar to my posts recently on Isaac's Facebook page. He deleted all of my posts and blocked me from the page within a few hours. They are driven by fear and embarrassment. So censorship is always their fallback.

Cowbob has been afraid of me ever since I challenged him to a written debate on the scriptural and scientific basis for his ongoing pseudoscience and general nonsense in misusing the scriptures.

The fruit of young earth creationist lying and their war on science is the bigotry, and deliberate deletion/censorship of relevant but inconvenient facts, that we see from the likes of Bob Sorensen and Issac Bourne (and don't forget that a creationist leapt at the opportunity to be the running mate and now vice-President of the lying bullying narcissist Donald Trump).

A week or two back, on 20 April, I commented here as follows:"An article appeared recently in the New York Times:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/opin ... share&_r=2It reveals the astonishing way in which 'evangelicals' (I think the writer may really mean 'fundamentalists') in America have felt free for years to deny point-blank (and without necessarily understanding properly what they are denying) various claims and findings from science - because of how they conflict with a 'biblical worldview'. I think a key paragraph in the article is the following: "... the worldview that has propelled mainstream Western intellectual life and made modern civilization possible is a kind of pragmatism. It is an empirical outlook that continually — if imperfectly — revises its conclusions based on evidence available to everyone, regardless of their beliefs about the supernatural. This worldview clashes with the conservative evangelical war on facts, but it is not necessarily incompatible with Christian faith."

That New York Times opinion piece which seems to have irked Answers in Genesis also said of their Phd scientist Dr Nathaniel Jeanson:"Yet when his colleagues refuse to read his creationist papers and data sets, he takes their snub as proof that they can find no flaws in his research. “If people who devote their lives to it can’t point anything out, then I think I may be on to something,” he said." Yet it is untrue, even if the article implies the opposite, that everyone refuses to read Dr Jeanson's more accessible creationist papers - for instance critical responses have appeared at Panda's Thumb and Naturalis Historia (as well as on this community forum).

Ham quotes Jeanson's indignant sounding reaction to the opinion piece. For instance:"First, her article is critical of the distrust that creationists have of mainstream media. Is it any wonder that this distrust exists, when the mainstream media prints reflections like Worthen’s? It’s as if the NYT is deliberately writing for a die-hard, non-creationist audience. And then the NYT wonders why those outside of this die-hard, non-creationist camp distrust the NYT."

But the people who started fighting a war on scientific facts (by censorship and at facilities like the Ark Encounter and Creation Museum) are the young earth creationists at Answers in Genesis. And their war extends to the mainstream media even though these media are not discovering the facts these creationists detest but merely (imperfectly but in an unbiased manner much of the time) reporting them. Why should the media not - in an era of deliberate fake news - highlight how creationists like Jeanson (and Ham) constantly complain about the media?

Jeanson also tries to claim that he is not (because he didn't admit to it when interviewed) a presuppositional evidentialist. Yet Answers in Genesis ARE, by precisely how they speak and argue, undeniably presuppositionalists (they seem to hate being identified for what they really are):https://answersingenesis.org/presupposi ... ologetics/

Jeanson complains of "shoddy journalism and poor research". And given how AiG REFUSE serious engagement with their critics (resorting to blatant silent censorship) his complaint about lack of serious engagement with his particular claims is endlessly hypocritical. (Assuming he does know how AiG behave on their facebook pages - the ONLY place associated with AiG where comments on their articles can be posted.)

Sorensen referenced my post above, at 17.54 pm on 10 May, when writing his hate-filled comment "By the way, you got Haywire the Stalker angry. Not a difficult thing. He acts like everything he does is good and has all the facts, and those who reject his nonsense are stupid evil fascist cowards. He cries a lot. -CBB"

Now we get this LYING from Christian Jaeschke (who has morphed overnight into Christian Adama):https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/"Wow. These idiots have to boast about their triumphs by lying because they have nothing. They're nothing more than bullies and cowards. How unsurprising. Thanks, QEP."

WHERE did I lie on 10 May?WHERE did I bully on 10 May?WHERE did I show cowardice on 10 May?I had PLENTY in my post here on 10 May.

Unless you can show otherwise Jaeschke/Adama the liar, bully, coward and hater of facts and lover of censorship is YOU. To which I would add delusional hypocrite.

I have proven FRAUD by Answers in Genesis over the Lost Squadron. Huge ice cores have been extracted from the ice sheet in the dry interior of Greenland - which is NOT where these planes landed, near the coast where snowfall is much more frequent. Answers in Genesis were called out and beaten by real scientific FACTS and they knew it - so they had NO option other than to CENSOR and BAN me lest anyone (with an ounce of common sense and objectivity) might see their deliberate fraud in the name of Christianity. You people are ignoring or defending FRAUD.

https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken- ... -highways/"The idea that this is “rapid evolution” is a worldview-based interpretation of the evidence. The researchers start with the assumption of molecules-to-man evolution and interpret the evidence through that lens.But these small changes aren’t evolutionary changes. No new genetic information is being added to the genomes of plants or amphibians. Each group is either losing or reshuffling information to deal with the changes and stresses of their changing environment. This isn’t evolution (which requires an addition of brand-new information). It’s variability within a created kind—natural selection operating on the genetic information that is already present."

So if there is no new genetic information and such is 'not possible' then this DIDN'T happen:"God created living things" and "each kind could adapt to changing environments (but adaptation is confined within a kind, which is exactly what we observe)" and also "we would expect this to happen fairly quickly seeing that there’s only been 6,000 years since creation and about 4,350 years since the Flood".

Oh I forgot - AiG have also unilaterally declared, including in this blog, that "God created living things with an incredible amount of genetic variability" (that means beyond anything that has EVER been seen by biologists). So-called 'created heterozygosity'. So Ken can have his cake AND eat it - 'no' evolution but instead today's life or land-based life at least (and extinct life too) is all descended from a motley crew of paired 'kinds' on Noah's Ark 4,350 years ago. This being made possible not by real life new genetic information - but instead by as yet (and probably forever) fictional 'created heterozygosity'. (Created heterozygosity that could only ever lead to massive and extremely rapid adaptation ie speciation within separate 'kinds' you must understand.)

Make It Up As You Go Along is NOT science but a rescuing device for religiously motivated pseudo-science. Ken was not there at creation and he and his 'experts' are also making assumptions that go way beyond anything in Genesis.

And what Ham claims has been 'observed' by scientists is what is seen on human lifespan timescales - not millions of years of time.

Meanwhile CMI are fretting about the beliefs of Christians regarding the flood described in Genesis:http://creation.com/local-flood"But, far from being theologically inconsequential, our understanding of the Flood (Genesis 6–9) reveals whether we are approaching Scripture with the proper hermeneutic. The secular world pressures Christians to deny the catastrophic judgment of a global Flood. Instead, they interpret the evidence of rock layers and fossils as having formed over millions of years. Yet, because the Bible clearly teaches that the Flood was global (as shown below), it serves as a touchstone to see whether we will remain faithful, “rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15).""CMI has even published testimonies about wavering believers whose faith was rescued upon seeing that both Scripture and scientific evidence support a global Flood." Christians who have been DECEIVED since science (and history) support NO SUCH THING. It's virtual blackmail to imply that if you suggest a local flood you are on the verge of LOSING YOUR CHRISTIAN FAITH. This all verges on theological bullying of Christians. They must ONLY consider Bible verses, NOTHING else!

Many UK churches are still, I suspect (after a decade of absence from my local C of E church), free of young earth creationist lying, divisiveness, and distracting away from either the gospel or from social engagement. Looks like the last big AiG mega conference in the West Midlands achieved little. So they are holding another one:https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken- ... -its-gone/

"We want to help inspire a Genesis reformation in Europe and encourage churches to return to the authority of God’s Word in all areas—beginning in the book of Genesis." Says one egotistical and dishonest Australian indoctrinator of kids, plus a load of very right wing Americans who detest scientific realities.

https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/simo ... istration/"The UK Creation Mega Conference, now only a few months away (October 26–28), is a unique opportunity to hear some of the world's leading biblical creationists and apologists speak on the gospel, and topics of biblical authority, apologetics, biology, astronomy, geology, design, and how science confirms the truth of biblical history.We are also delighted to partner once again with Tirzah Jones from Day One Youth Ministries to coordinate and lead our program for children aged 7–11. Due to demand, we have now made arrangements to have a different room for Mega Kids, which can hold up to 200 children! We can also now announce that John Mackay and Dr. Danny Faulkner will be giving special talks exclusively for Mega Kids on the topics of dinosaurs and astronomy. So don't let your children miss out! Book now for just £5 per child. Please note, other children and young people (18 and under) who are ineligible for Mega Kids (those age 5–11) are free to come but must register for their free conference ticket and be accompanied by an adult."

We are being told UK Christians need 'equipping'. And guess who wants to do this 'equipping'. And what age group they appear to be primarily targeting for the 'equipping'.

https://answersingenesis.org/sunday-sch ... ity-truth/ 'Empowering Christians with the Authority of Truth'"What makes the Creation Museum, Ark Encounter, and the message of AiG so powerful? How is it so inspiring to Christians (and infuriating to atheists)? In a word, authority. In two words, biblical authority.You see, the core message of AiG is that all of God’s Word is true! It’s right about the beginning, middle, and the end. It’s right about salvation! Why? Because God gets everything right; therefore his Word is always the ultimate authority and always trustworthy.For the believer, this message of biblical authority is exceptionally empowering because it directly addresses the enemy’s modern-day attack that has subtly eroded the confidence of many Christians to stand on the Word of God. For generations now Christians have been bombarded with the refrain that the Bible cannot be trusted in this “scientific age.” As a result, many have either compromised the Bible’s clear teaching on origins, which has gospel consequences, or have been embarrassed into silence, which also has gospel consequences."

This is fanaticism where the ends justify the means, including lying as many times as is necessary (that's a lot of times) about biology and the like.

No. It's not 'biblical authority' (which means what AIG CLAIM not merely what the Bible says) which people may be infuriated by. Rather it is the power and arrogance of self-appointed 'creationist' experts who cynically lie [see eg previous posts in this thread] to the gullible in an effort to turn them fanatical, vocal, closed-minded and militant (not based on the gospel but on the opening chapters of Genesis) which annoys the hell out of many people, including more moderate and honest Christians.

"So many people are revolutionized by realizing that the Bible’s plain history is true; that real science confirms biblical historical events; and that, by standing on God’s Word, Christians have good answers to the skeptical questions of this age." ('Revolutionised' sounds a bit similar to 'radicalised' in the case of islamist fanatics.)

Thanks to AiG and their ilk, these Christians have decided that all other opinions to young earth creationism are evil and from the devil. Yes. And think of Ken Ham shamelessly indoctrinating audiences of kids about a 'recent global flood' and humans living 'alongside' dinosaurs. This is some sort of cult pushing falsehoods and fanaticism in the name of the Christian gospel. The evidence is NOT on their side. Hence the indoctrination and the whipping up of fanaticism and talk of 'power' and 'authority'. Plus the hard pushing of AiG CURRICULAR materials! Followed by the question"Will you Stand?" These people have NO scruples, no shame and no integrity. (Previously someone indoctrinated them or maybe they indoctrinated themselves.)